Things which are most likely to 'kill' you
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Among the Clouds
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Things which are most likely to 'kill' you
To know your enemy is the first step in avoiding and mitigating it. This is a LIGHT-HEARTED but 'true' thread to identify the BIGGEST threat in your daily operations. A few examples:
1. Calm and variable wind at airport-many firmed the landing in such conditions
2. Extensive squall lines enroute
3. The person on the other seat-unable to handle explosive decompression while you are in the toilet
4. Angry purser poisoning you
5. The other person tailstrike/slams the aircraft on your watch
Anyone else wanna share. Don't be too serious or judgmental ya.
1. Calm and variable wind at airport-many firmed the landing in such conditions
2. Extensive squall lines enroute
3. The person on the other seat-unable to handle explosive decompression while you are in the toilet
4. Angry purser poisoning you
5. The other person tailstrike/slams the aircraft on your watch
Anyone else wanna share. Don't be too serious or judgmental ya.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Among the Clouds
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frankly I also wish that it was that simple. Upon revisiting the "Tech Log" part I saw no such listing or summary. By "kill" I mean Incident/Accident Report required.
Thanks again.
Thanks again.
An OPS departement that try to force crews to operate in 50kt winds or other servere wx, asking for 4 more approaches on acars. At the same time lying about the fact that you are way out of Duty time.
How about the Captain who accepts such demands from Ops, or who does not know his flight & duty time limitations well enough to challenge them?
Or who is not far enough ahead of the aeroplane to prevent the other guy from punching the gear up through the wing or knocking off the tail?
Or who can 't read the weather well enough to know what is dangerous and what is merely uncomfortable?
The odds of an explosive decompression while you are in the toilet are minuscule - unless it is you having it. See below...
The purser won't get angry and poison you if you don't hit on his boyfriend.
Unless you fly in Syria or have your maintenance done in Sierra Leone, the most likely thing in aviation to get you killed is the drive home from the airport.
Or who is not far enough ahead of the aeroplane to prevent the other guy from punching the gear up through the wing or knocking off the tail?
Or who can 't read the weather well enough to know what is dangerous and what is merely uncomfortable?
The odds of an explosive decompression while you are in the toilet are minuscule - unless it is you having it. See below...
The purser won't get angry and poison you if you don't hit on his boyfriend.
Unless you fly in Syria or have your maintenance done in Sierra Leone, the most likely thing in aviation to get you killed is the drive home from the airport.
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 17th Jan 2015 at 23:03.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Among the Clouds
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those who have been around may attest that not all (probably most) companies are so straightforward n clear cut. Operational efficiency (aka costs n profits) adds much pressure to some. Challenge if often not welcomed in quite a number of entities. Happy for your fortune.
Your second point is interesting. My guess is most commanders are very focused on the landing. Not all are thinking far ahead of where to exit, which may not be a bad thing. But statistics have shown that firm n hard landings still occur. Care to shed the light on how your paradigm could avert this?
Uncomfortable to some may be dangerous to others. Many a time I hear people slam in light n variable wind. My doubt on many to call this uncomfortable.
You have named one of the many reason of the possible animosity between cockpit n cabin crew. Not all enterprise share as an amicable relationship as yours, alas. ;( Maybe it is your technique, else you have a good company to work for. Friend of an enemy? Who knows. Anyway possibilities abound to one eventual cause.
I wish life is simple or could be simplified to a word, or maybe a few words. But it is probably a summary. Good enough to give an idea, not good enough to skip the contents. Complacency, airmanship, SA, professionalism.
Your second point is interesting. My guess is most commanders are very focused on the landing. Not all are thinking far ahead of where to exit, which may not be a bad thing. But statistics have shown that firm n hard landings still occur. Care to shed the light on how your paradigm could avert this?
Uncomfortable to some may be dangerous to others. Many a time I hear people slam in light n variable wind. My doubt on many to call this uncomfortable.
You have named one of the many reason of the possible animosity between cockpit n cabin crew. Not all enterprise share as an amicable relationship as yours, alas. ;( Maybe it is your technique, else you have a good company to work for. Friend of an enemy? Who knows. Anyway possibilities abound to one eventual cause.
I wish life is simple or could be simplified to a word, or maybe a few words. But it is probably a summary. Good enough to give an idea, not good enough to skip the contents. Complacency, airmanship, SA, professionalism.
Hard landings that require maintenance action are almost always entirely preventable, so should not be an issue.
'Firm' landings are never an issue, other than sometimes denting the ego of the handling pilot.
Both pilots must insist on stabilising the approach. The point at which it must be stabilised will vary from company to company, and by aircraft type.
In difficult weather conditions, sometimes the stable approach unexpectedly tends towards being unstable at low level, particularly if the pilot flying is not experienced and alert.
Whether the commander can intervene to salvage the landing, or should commence a go-around, depends on his/her skill level and also on the handling characteristics of the aircraft type. Sometimes intervention may be required during the flare, at which point a go around could be impractical or unnecessary.
On a few occasions I have let the F/O go too far and have been rewarded by a very firm and hence embarrassing landing. Which has taught both of us a lesson.
And in my early days I did a few myself.
But in over 50 years have never had a 'heavy landing' requiring maintenance. It is surprising what a beating an airframe can take!
Perhaps someone who has had the unfortunate experience of causing - or being party to - damage during a landing, would be brave enough to share with us what went wrong, and why.
But on the list of things likely to kill you, even if the F/O is a 300 hour Cadet and provided that the Captain is competent, landing should not feature.
Take-off is far more dangerous, if only because you have the whole flight ahead of you, thus more time for stuff to go wrong.
'Firm' landings are never an issue, other than sometimes denting the ego of the handling pilot.
Both pilots must insist on stabilising the approach. The point at which it must be stabilised will vary from company to company, and by aircraft type.
In difficult weather conditions, sometimes the stable approach unexpectedly tends towards being unstable at low level, particularly if the pilot flying is not experienced and alert.
Whether the commander can intervene to salvage the landing, or should commence a go-around, depends on his/her skill level and also on the handling characteristics of the aircraft type. Sometimes intervention may be required during the flare, at which point a go around could be impractical or unnecessary.
On a few occasions I have let the F/O go too far and have been rewarded by a very firm and hence embarrassing landing. Which has taught both of us a lesson.
And in my early days I did a few myself.
But in over 50 years have never had a 'heavy landing' requiring maintenance. It is surprising what a beating an airframe can take!
Perhaps someone who has had the unfortunate experience of causing - or being party to - damage during a landing, would be brave enough to share with us what went wrong, and why.
But on the list of things likely to kill you, even if the F/O is a 300 hour Cadet and provided that the Captain is competent, landing should not feature.
Take-off is far more dangerous, if only because you have the whole flight ahead of you, thus more time for stuff to go wrong.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Tree
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tell ya what may well kill you trying to get airborne, without checking these.
F - Flaps, set and indicated.
A - Airbrakes stowed.
R - Runway, correctly identified.
T - Trims set.
S - Speeds, correct and checked/bugged.
Yes it's all old hat of course but you would be surprised how often they are not checked as they should be.
F - Flaps, set and indicated.
A - Airbrakes stowed.
R - Runway, correctly identified.
T - Trims set.
S - Speeds, correct and checked/bugged.
Yes it's all old hat of course but you would be surprised how often they are not checked as they should be.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Among the Clouds
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot explain this myself but I feel safer driving, at least in my country, than flying. Though statistics may prove otherwise in terms of chances.
Nonetheless I am not unhappy with such apprehension. Healthy caution and fear is named survival instinct by some.
Judging from the limited responses, many aviators are quite fearless people.
Nonetheless I am not unhappy with such apprehension. Healthy caution and fear is named survival instinct by some.
Judging from the limited responses, many aviators are quite fearless people.
No, 'tho I only fly microlights ( LSA's ) now, having lined up and completed all the checks - including activating the transponder - I then say "what's going to kill us today", and check again the fuel, ignition, flaps, w/v, runway heading on the compass ( no D.I. ) - then check for parachutes, it being an unattended airfield with a busy Tandem Parachute operation whose young, new, CPL's think that flying, and using the radio, as fast as is (in)humanly possible is most professional.
Ye canna be toooo carrrrefulll.
Ye canna be toooo carrrrefulll.
Last edited by ExSp33db1rd; 21st Jan 2015 at 07:30.
